Posted on 11/02/2004 11:20:24 AM PST by tpaine
Is the Constitution the supreme "Law of the Land" and above the States?
Yes!
Is the Constitution the supreme "Law of the Land" and above the States?
Yes!
Not true.And I would have to retort: "unsubstantiated".
For one, Weaver had a record; he was a known law-breaker.
Vernon Wayne Howell had also crossed the line, and 'broken laws'.
Don't confuse the issue of 'breaking laws', persuing lawful invetigations followed up by a jury trial in your haste to re-write history in order to obtain a goal for your own ends, it's unbecoming and can only lead to your telling lies and spinning the truth ...
Let's say you have a contract with someone to cut your grass every week for $20. That contract is binding on both of you, and you each are assigned an obligation. He is obliged to cut the grass weekly, and you are obliged to give him give him $20 weekly.
That's the deal. Oh, there's a clause in the contract saying that the contract is supreme. No other contracts apply to you or him.
Now, does that mean you have to cut your own grass? According to you it does.
What you say is true enough, but it only works when wielded against small numbers. An attempt to use that might against the People at large would be the means to their end. I would personally seek to aquire much of their weaponry, as would many others, of that I'm positive. Blackbird.
Precisely. That why the Constitution has a Bill of Rights that includes the the Second Amendment.
That’s just what Robert E. Lee, Randy Weaver and David Koresh said!
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
I knew it had to be either you or robert that posted this! Nice diversion on Election Day.
Whatever the result of this thread may be (or not be *lol* ) - don't get so involved as to forget to VOTE !!!
Be well and I'll join this debate at another time . . .
Freeregards,
AAE
The Constitution restricts the powers of government.
Agreed, only if the author means the powers of ALL LEVELS of government in the USA.
The deception is that the government can interpret the all of the amendments and the Constitution itself.
Who agrees with this "deception"? Who is claiming that any of our various governments have the power to so interpret? The Constitution itself says otherwise in the 10th Amendment.
Without the presence of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights this may be a valid argument.
Meaningless conclusion. The author is just repeating the point shes trying to make.
The powers of the federal government are explicitly limited to only those areas so granted by the states (which created the federal government in the first place). The states remain sovereign and superior in all other areas. It is the theory of dual sovereignty put forth by Madison. The Constitution was written and ratified by the states, and is not a check on the states' powers, but rather the federal government's. To wit:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
[James Madison, The Federalist No. 45]
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
[10th Amendment, United States Constitution]
Law breakers both.
Not true. Both men [& their families] were attacked before reasonable attempts were made to arrest them, and bring them to trial, -- as you well know.
Lovely examples for us all to 'emulate' to be sure ...
No one here has set them up as examples to emulate. That's your delusion, _jim.
Why is it 99.999 percent of us have NO problem with 'the law' but these guys did?
Apparently its because they 'dissed' the BATF. It's a little like how you dis our Constitutional rule of law, _jim my boy.
Simple answer: either it was predestination/preordination, or, they strayed just a little TOO FAR over the line and 'broke the law' - which can, and usually does, have consequences in this country ...
Indeed it does.. Yet we have men like you who run about this site showing disdain for our BOR's, who are rarely even chastised for their over the line behavior. Go figure.
And I would have to retort: "unsubstantiated". For one, Weaver had a record; he was a known law-breaker. Vernon Wayne Howell had also crossed the line, and 'broken laws'.
We all do _jim. I'd bet you that any day you go to work you break many 'laws' of one sort or another. It's literally impossible to avoid doing so.
Don't confuse the issue of 'breaking laws', persuing lawful invetigations followed up by a jury trial in your haste to re-write history
How weird _jim. Here you are trying to prove Koresh & Weaver deserved having their families killed for being generic 'law'breakers, in your own haste to rewrite their histories.
in order to obtain a goal for your own ends, it's unbecoming and can only lead to your telling lies and spinning the truth ...
I'm spinning nothing here _jimboy. You're the one with delusions.
"The Constitution restricts the powers of government."
I think this is the main point she was making. My contention as well when I offered the other day that our rights are supreme over the Constitution AND governments.
The big lie is that gummint is saying in essence that its interpretation of the Consitution is the supreme law. Congress and the states give lip service to the pursuancy clause, but ignore its essence -- the fact that laws must be in pursuance to the Constitution, but ignore the fact that the BOR sits on top of the hierarchy of the Constitution.
You admit that an article of our Constitutional contract says that the contract is the supreme law, the laws of any State "notwithstanding", -- yet you claim it doesn't apply to States.
It is simply the document itself (and the laws made in pursuance thereof) that are supreme.
Exactly. "The document itself" is our supreme law, the laws of any State "notwithstanding".
Thus the Constitution and ALL its Amendments apply to the States.
Let's say you have a contract with someone to cut your grass every week for $20.
That contract is binding on both of you, and you each are assigned an obligation. He is obliged to cut the grass weekly, and you are obliged to give him give him $20 weekly.
That's the deal.
Oh, there's a clause in the contract saying that the contract is supreme. No other contracts apply to you or him.
That is not what Article VI 'says' in our Constitution. It says that the Constitution and ALL its Amendments apply to the States.
Now, does that mean you have to cut your own grass? According to you it does.
Bizzare conclusion paulsen. You really do need rest. Go cut your grass.
This comment is not true, proved by your own quote of the 1Oth:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." [10th Amendment, United States Constitution]
Thus your conclusion falls apart. Some 'State powers' are checked, -- prohibited by our Constitution.
One such is the power to unreasonably regulate our RKBA's.
It cannot be infringed upon by States. -- Ask paulsen about it once he mows his grass.
Yes. My point was that the constitution is being at best ignored and at worst, downright subverted. Just taking the Second Amendment, one of the more important articles in the Bill of Rights, the left is making great headway in getting the public to believe it’s all about hunting. Nothing could be further from the truth!
The public at large doesn’t even know who Randy Weaver is or what happened to him and they believe Koresh got what was coming to him.
(Sorry...I’m getting started...)
Anyway, “He who would trade freedom for security deserves neither (or words to that effect).” Here’s to the Internet, the last bastion of freedom on the planet (warts and all)!
I have to disagree. The leftists in this country poured through the gates back in the ’40’s, what with Roosevelt’s infatuation with Stalin. “Street theater” will not dislodge them. Strength and honor will.
David Koresh committed no crime. He was assaulted without warning by cattle cars full of BATF agents (the same ones who were at Ruby Ridge).
The federal government literally got away with murder in those two cases, democrats and Republicans alike.
I think you misunderstand. If you see buckets of hot tar being carried through the streets, can the feathers be far behind?
Uh Oh! You just touched the tar-baby. ;>
The federal government literally got away with murder in those two cases, democrats and Republicans alike.
57 MountainPete
______________________________________
Uh Oh! You just touched the tar-baby. ;>
59 Eastbound
______________________________________
_Jim is, of course, FR's tar baby for the federal POV.
Amazing how many there are here, -- that cheer on the federal governments usurptions of our Constitutional rights, just because the Grand Old Party is in [supposed] control at this point in time.
How soon we forget that political fortunes change.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.